2025
Encouraging value-driven decisions in pet product purchasing — A UX Case Study
As part of my UX Research module at Hyper Island, we were asked to pick a brief and over 4 weeks, create a fully fleshed out case study.
My semi-fictional client sells sustainable pet goods and provided a clear user persona: a millennial dog owner who values aesthetics, shops according to her beliefs, and posts about it online. She’s environmentally conscious and willing to pay more for better products.
Using this launch point, I muscled through UX research methods that were completely new to me as a UX Design student. I wanted to understand the behavior behind those values. What influences purchase decisions for people’s pets, and how might sustainability fit into that equation?
Process Overview
I began by mapping out my assumptions and evaluating their risk levels. Next, I created hypotheses and interview questions, and designed a screener survey to recruit participants. I interviewed six pet owners, had them card sort a list of features, then synthesized the findings into principles and actionable insights.
Who I Designed For
While I started with the provided persona, I broadened my pool to pet owners of different ages to get a wider range of motivations and behaviors. Everyone I spoke to had a pet, used social media regularly, and cared about sustainability. But how that played out in their decisions varied.
How might we create behavior changes in favor of new sustainable products?
Mapping out needs, target audience, and prioritization in Figma.
What I Assumed and What I Found
I started with five hypotheses:
Users are more likely to purchase pet products if the marketing clearly outlines how they address specific health concerns. Disproven.
Users are more likely to adopt subscription models for regularly consumed products because of the convenience. Inconclusive.
Users who prioritize sustainability are more likely to purchase from brands with transparent sourcing. Disproven.
Users with financial stability are more likely to prioritize long-term quality over price. Proven.
Social media–active users will be more likely to buy aesthetically pleasing products they can share online. Disproven.
Key Insights
Trust drives decisions, not branding.
Most users rely on advice from their veterinarian or close friends before trying a new pet product.Convenience outweighs sustainability.
Participants wanted to shop sustainably, but not if it impacted performance or price.Price is flexible when value is clear.
Users were open to paying more if the product felt reliable and high-quality.Packaging design plays a minor role.
Looks didn’t matter, what works does.
Card Sorting & Screener Survey
Affordability, accessibility, and specific health needs consistently ranked as essential across participants. Packaging design was low-priority, with just one exception: a designer who explicitly valued visual appeal. Subscriptions were in the middle — not must-haves, but not dismissed either.
Principles
Based on these insights, I developed a set of guiding principles for designing sustainable pet products:
Leverage trusted voices. Recommendations from veterinarians and peers hold the most sway.
Make sustainability seamless. Responsible options must be just as easy and reliable as conventional ones.
Build confidence through quality. Ensure users feel secure in what they’re purchasing, regardless of price point.
Prioritize utility over image. Focus on effectiveness rather than aesthetics alone.
Next Steps
The brief asked how we might shift behavior toward sustainable products. What I found is that the shift doesn’t start with sustainability—it starts with trust, ease, and confidence. Meet users there, and the change becomes not only possible, but natural. I proposed the following steps for the client:
Explore partnerships with veterinarians to boost credibility.
Reevaluate the subscription model to better understand how it could fit into user routines.
Design for convenient sustainability, minimizing effort.
Clarify messaging to highlight long-term value and product quality.
Reassess social media’s role. Visual appeal may not convert, but social proof might.
Reflection:
Next time, I’d write tighter hypotheses and ask better questions around financial stability. But mostly, I’d remember that being wrong is part of growth. As our course lead Jules put it:
“Failing to prove a hypothesis doesn’t mean you failed. It means you found something valuable.”